Cthulhu is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones Date Process Result March 3, 2007 Featured article candidate Not promoted June 10, 2007 Peer review Reviewed
Current status: Former featured article candidate

Horror B‑class High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

the article is huge, and some people obviously put some time into it, but there's practically speaking NO INFORMATION on what cthuluhu actually DOES, or WILL do, or what the deal is. the ONLY specific piece of information is that he will be "ravenous" in "delight" or something like that. .....what is that supposed to entail? i assume lovecraft's source material gives more details than that. otherwise the whole idea of cthulhu is nothing but a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury signifying nothing. somebody please put in some details about what cthulhu will actually DO when he rises.

That's the thing, there's not much information on what he will actually do. Cthulhu is a horror creature of the oldschool, where things were implied but not spelled out... the idea, of course, being that the horrible images the reader would create in the mind are far worse than anything the writer can put to paper. 69.64.10.249 16:00, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, IMHO, there is enough information, the quote about "liberated Old Ones would teach them new ways to shout and kill and revel and enjoy themselves, and all the earth would flame with a holocaust of ecstasy" spells it pretty well --AlexeyTOD 14:20, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The think the request is relevant; finding sources that discuss the fact that Lovecraft wasn't very clear (and perhaps why) would not only be helpful to the reader, it would make the article more encyclopedic because it would focus less on the in-universe information overall.--otherlleft 12:26, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A note, on the removal from the article of the "kuh-loo-oo" pronunciation: As I recall, Cthulhu has been pronounced "kuh-loo-oo", and by no lesser person than Lovecraft himself. Nobody's quite sure how he got "kuh-loo-oo" from "Cthulhu" (or vice versa), though. --Paul A 01:25 Feb 21, 2003 (UTC)

Originally it uses the Welsh "ll" sound to express the slimy slitheriness of the beast, like a snake's mungent hiss... if you are familiar with Welsh pronunciations of the vowels and consonants "cllyllu" (a bit like "kuh hluh hlee"... but not really!) ...but kuh thoo loo is just as agreeable a pronunciation (even if it's wrong!). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.114.8.120 (talk) 22:23, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the quote, "That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons even death may die," in the story The Nameless City by H.P. Lovecraft, the protagonist says that the verse refers to the alligator/seal beings that live in the eponymous nameless city in the middle of the desert. "It was of this place that Abdul Alhazred the mad poet dreamed of the night before he sang his unexplained couplet:" It might be worth mentioning this, in the section where it says the verse usually relates to Cthulhu. --67.188.65.218 18:55, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Its also worth mentioning that Cthulhu appeared in an episode of the new Justice League cartoon series that runs are Cartoon Network. They pronounced the name "Ich-thoo-loo". He wasn't very Lovecraftian insomuch as Superman punching him in the face did him significant harm, but that's DC for you.

Cthulhu isn't supposed to be very well known; his motives are intended to be obscure, as are his actions. We don't need to know that he 'does' anything. Quoting Shakespeare doesn't change this.

That's all well and good, but the article doesn't even go THAT far. The encyclopediac approach, by its nature, is supposed to explain things. If the full nature of Cthulhu is unexplained in the stories themselves, at least tell us THAT. Enwilson 06:26, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See above, there is sufficient information on his intentions. Not much, okay, but sufficient --AlexeyTOD 14:20, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I dont have the links off hand, and I'm not on my own PC, but as far as I'm aware, the main theme in Lovecraft's works (and reading them seems to support this) is the complete insignificance of mankind in the order of things, and that if we were to catch a glimpse of what 'lies beyond' we'd go mad. So we don't know what Cthulhu "does", we cant possibly know because he is a being totally beyond our knowledge, and as the stories are told from a human perspective, there is very ittle information on him.--81.151.163.142 23:33, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I feel that the oldest and most serious Cthulhu-based religion, the Cult of Cthulhu, should be represented. Most treat Lovecraft's Cthulhu Mythos as fiction, but for some it is a reality. The Cult of Cthulhu is an international organization lead by High Priest Venger Satanis, website: http://www.CultofCthulhu.net

What we would need to link to the Cult of Cthulhu is some evidence that the Cult is notable--that is, that people other than the Cult itself have paid attention to the Cult. Nareek 20:35, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LMFAO

Only my good manners and wikipolicies keep me from wiping this entry out completely --AlexeyTOD 17:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hahaha sure and some think jedi's are real.. so the only think your Cult of Cthulhu shows that intelligence do not have a lowest level :) 85.81.64.141 (talk) 19:42, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Though I don't belong to the cult, I'd venture to guess that they're more interested in the concept of an uncaring universe than literally believing Cthulhu exists; of course there are many people that believe in everything from reincarnation to supreme beings —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.79.175.195 (talk) 00:05, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A related note is that the Cult of Cthulhu's bible incorporates significant content from Wikipedia. (see this blog post) So perhaps it's free content now. :) Bryan Derksen (talk) 01:01, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Returned the note on non-universality of Derleth's interpretation, and supplied it with printed source that has ISBN --User:AlexeyTOD 20:55 Jun 28, 2007 (UTC)

The word which arrives from modern near-eastern languages stems from the older language from that area. ku.tu.lu is a perfectly agreeable word in syntax and semantics, meaning simply the man (lu) from kutu.

That's cool. Now we'd need to show that Lovecraft was aware of this, that there was a reason he referred to "kutu", and that Cthulhu was supposed to be a man. It seems more likely that he invented the name, given his attachment to digraphs with "h", like Azathoth, Ulthar, Celephaïs, Sarnath, and Kadath. The name Cthulhu also rings of "chthonic", "of the underworld". --Milkbreath (talk) 17:00, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The etymology Kutulu comes from the Simonomicon, which doesn't appear to be older than 1977 (unless the atheistic Lovecraft was actually a Cthulhu worshipper who wrote stories about the very book he sought to keep secret from people by claiming he made it up). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ian.thomson (talk • contribs) 00:37, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This talk page has been growing slowly, but steadily. Anyone have a problem with me setting up an archive bot? Given the activity here, I think archiving threads older than 90 days might be about right.--otherlleft 12:05, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, sure. Thanks. Ian.thomson (talk) 12:11, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The references section is ambiguous because it's not linked to any inline citations. I've removed some dead links and unclear references and suggest eliminating the section entirely by providing inline citations to all the relevant entries. A featured article must use inline citations, and there's no reason to think that this won't rise to that level at some point.--otherlleft 12:19, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cthulu has appeared in the recently released game Scribblenauts, for the Nintendo D.S. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.66.20.118 (talk) 20:33, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I came to this article as a novice to horror and Cthulu, and after reading it I have to agree with the flag at the top of the article which states it is very poorly written. It is almost like an academic article, or a Sunday newspaper abstract discussion of the topic. It is definitely not appropriate for an encyclopaedia entry. It does nothing to inform the reader about basic facts of the subject. Its just an esoteric discussion. Im not qualified to improve it at all, but I have to say (as constructively as possible) this is a very poor Wikipedia entry.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Fmjue (talk • contribs) 12:16, 13 November 2009

Which article are you talking about? The Cthulhu article seems like a fairly comprehensive study of the character's fictional background and appearances, and I can't see what "basic facts" have been overlooked. What do you feel is missing? Or (given that you mention a "flag" at the top of the article, which isn't present here), are you talking about a different Lovecraft article? --McGeddon (talk) 12:59, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]